DILBERT CREATOR WARNS HITLER COMPARISONS WILL GET TRUMP ASSASSINATED

It seems that as time goes on, the anti-Trump crowd is growing more and more aggressive. That was obvious enough last week, when thousands of protesters on both sides of the aisle clashed in San Jose, California. Anti-Trump protesters were seen assaulting police officers, chasing and beating Trump supporters, and even pelting one woman with eggs.

But this aggressive attitude wasn’t just seen among protesters in the streets. As the protests in San Jose reached a fever pitch, Vox editor Emmett Rensin tweeted “If Trump comes to your town, start a riot.”; a comment which eventually led to his suspension. As for why Rensin thinks that rioting is an appropriate response to Trump, he later explained that“Listen, if Trump is Hitler then you’ve got no business condemning rioters.”

And that pretty much sums up in a nutshell, why anti-Trump protesters are so aggressive. They sincerely believe that Trump is the next incarnation of Hitler, so fighting his supporters is completely justified in their minds. After all, if Hitler was running for office right now, wouldn’t you kick the crap out of his followers?

That of course doesn’t mean that these people are correct. While Trump has made some statements that sound rather authoritarian, comparing him to Hitler is a stretch. But it does have to make you wonder. If a Hitler comparison is enough to convince people that they can physically harm Trump supporters, what will that lead to? If taken a step further, what does it mean for Donald Trump himself?

This past week we saw Clinton pair the idea of President Trump with nuclear disaster, racism, Hitler, the Holocaust, and whatever else makes you tremble in fear.

That is good persuasion if you can pull it off because fear is a strong motivator. It is also a sharp pivot from Clinton’s prior approach of talking about her mastery of policy details, her experience, and her gender. Trump took her so-called “woman card” and turned it into a liability. So Clinton wisely pivoted. Her new scare tactics are solid-gold persuasion. I wouldn’t be surprised if you see Clinton’s numbers versus Trump improve in June, at least temporarily, until Trump finds a counter-move.

The only downside I can see to the new approach is that it is likely to trigger a race war in the United States. And I would be a top-ten assassination target in that scenario because once you define Trump as Hitler, you also give citizens moral permission to kill him. And obviously it would be okay to kill anyone who actively supports a genocidal dictator, including anyone who wrote about his persuasion skills in positive terms. (I’m called an “apologist” on Twitter, or sometimes just Joseph Goebbels).

If Clinton successfully pairs Trump with Hitler in your mind – as she is doing – and loses anyway, about a quarter of the country will think it is morally justified to assassinate their own leader. I too would feel that way if an actual Hitler came to power in this country. I would join the resistance and try to take out the Hitler-like leader. You should do the same. No one wants an actual President Hitler.

Adams then goes on to endorse Hillary Clinton in a semi-joking manner. Not because he likes her policies, but because he fears for his safety.

I have no psychic powers and I don’t know which candidate would be the best president. But I do know which outcome is most likely to get me killed by my fellow citizens. So for safety reasons, I’m on team Clinton.

Ironic isn’t it? For decades the media and public have been comparing politicians of all stripes to Hitler. They did it so much that it became a meaningless slur. What was once a term used to disparage someone who was thought to be a tyrannical threat to our nation, is now being used to bully voters in the streets, much like Hitler’s brownshirts did in Weimar Germany. And if Scott Adams is correct, then down the road these Hitler comparisons may even threaten the stability of our nation.